4th Amendment Rights
We have all heard of it, but what does it mean and how does it affect you?
The language of the Fourth Amendment reads:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Simply put, the Fourth Amendment stops government agents (usually the police) from searching or seizing a person without first establishing probable cause and securing a warrant from a judge.
Enjoying this content? Find out how you can get more essential updates and self-defense information just like this sent straight to your inbox.
Unrestricted Search and Seizure
Before the Fourth Amendment came into being, Great Britain would use a legal instrument called a “Writ of Assistance” in the American colonies. These writs functioned as general search and seizure warrants. They had no requirement of what was or who was to be searched or seized. To make matters worse, they never expired and could be transferred from person to person.
These writs allowed the British government broad and general permission to interfere with the private lives of the colonists with no real restrictions. The British government could come and search whoever or whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted to.
Fourth Amendment Goals
The goal of the Fourth Amendment was to restrict government and provide security to Americans against this abuse. This is part of the “right of privacy” we as Americans enjoy. Today, in order for the government to search or seize something or someone, the general rule is, they must first obtain a warrant based upon probable cause from a neutral magistrate.
In Mapp v. Ohio the Supreme Court held that any evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment would not be admissible in court.
The Fourth Amendment Today
However, over the years courts have been granting more and more leniency on the admissibility of evidence, even if it could be argued that it is in violation of the Fourth Amendment. This is because the exceptions to the warrant requirement have almost completely swallowed the rule.
This is due in part to advancements in technology. The interpretation of the Fourth Amendment has been stretched to its limit for scenarios the Founders probably could not have imagined such as automobiles, computers, electronic mail, and phone metadata.
We have talked about the nearly endless list of ways police can search your car in the past, with the inventory and automobile exceptions, but it is important to know about other types of government encroachment on your right to privacy.
We see a recurring theme when it comes to this kind of governmental interference. A new technology emerges, law enforcement uses this technology, pushing the limits of the Fourth Amendment, and then the courts (sometimes) reign them in.
For example, there have been many cases dealing with cell phone searches. Up until very recently, the police would just search through someone’s cell phone without a warrant to see what they could find. The courts have now held that to search through someone’s cell phone, the police must first obtain a warrant.
Another example is the use of infrared. Essentially, police were using thermal imaging to look directly into a person’s house and could see people, fixtures within the home, or anything else that puts off a heat signature. Based upon what the police would see during that thermal search, they would then obtain a warrant for a physical search.
However, in Kyllo v. The United States, the Supreme Court held that the use of thermal image devices from a public vantage point to monitor a person’s home constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment and required a warrant. This is a fast-changing area of the law, and the courts will have to make decisions relating to the use of new technologies as they advance and whether they implicate the Fourth Amendment.
Your Rights
What you need to know: do not give up your 4th Amendment Rights. If an officer says he is going to conduct a search, invoke your rights and do not consent. They may search anyway, but at least now your attorney may be able to get that evidence thrown out in court.
If you have any questions about the Fourth Amendment, call U.S. LawShield and ask to speak with your Independent Program Attorney.
Your Protection Starts Here!
BECOME A MEMBERThe information provided in this presentation is intended to provide general information to individuals and is not legal advice. The information included in this publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication without the prior written consent of U.S. LawShield, to be given or withheld at our discretion. The information is not a substitute for, and does not replace the advice or representation of a licensed attorney. We strive to ensure the information included in this publication is accurate and current, however, no claim is made to the accuracy of the information and we are not responsible for any consequences that may result from the use of information in this publication. The use of this publication does not create an attorney-client relationship between U.S. LawShield, any independent program attorney, and any individual.
If you have nothing to hide what would you care if they looked into your vehicle!! Now sure if your a criminal and have illegal stuff in your car you wouldn’t want to allow them to look but then most criminals know not to allow this!! So what your saying is protect your right to criminal activity!!
I travel a lot and while traveling I tow and live in a 5th wheel RV, I consider it my home. Does the vehicle exception apply to the RV?
Also, once I politely decline to allow them to search can they detain me until they get a warrant?
Amen to not allowing overreach of law enforcement. What about road stop checkpoints for whatever reason, usually alcohol related. Isn’t this an unwarranted search?
Thanks, I KNOW MORE ABOUT THE FORTH AMENDMENT NOW. A few years ago I got pulled over and was asked if I had any fire arms in my vehicle. I did as I was on the way to the gun range. Is that question a sort of search?
I called and you said this was not covered by Texas law shield?? Curious to why I’m getting a email about now months later.
So if the officer wants to search my car, I’m supposed to say no, even if there’s nothing bad in it?
limits of the Fourth Amendment, and then the courts (sometimes) reign them in.
Kings REIGN
Courts REIN
To the comment that if you don’t have anything to hide then what’s the problem with a warrantless search? This logic is precisely what law enforcement banks on you thinking. One, they shouldn’t ask for a search and two, if you agree, then you’re quietly giving your rights away. That’s a slippery slope to begin. Next, if there’s low crime in your area then why do you need a gun? If there’s only Christians in your town then why do we need a mosque or synagogue? How about we already CNN on television so why allow Fox News to broadcast.
Hello. Question… Say you get pulled over for a traffic violation ie, tail light speeding. Do they then have probable cause to search?
Bobby Lee Stepp, the problem with allowing a search even though your innocent of any wrongdoing, is something could be planted or made up Etc to be used against you
I don’t understand this. So what if they want to search my car. I don’t do drugs and don’t do anything illegal so why should I care if they search it? I have nothing to hide. Beingnon the officers good side when he conducts a stop on me would aide me in getting off with a warning or speed up the process. Again, I don’t have or do anything illegal so they can search all they want, they won’t find anything.
For what it’s worth, not consenting to the police searching your vehicle is not an admission of guilt nor does this make an individual a criminal. This is not a Police State yet and we have Constitutional rights. 😐
Hmmm. So if we chose to exercise our 4th amendment rights does that make us all criminals? Why have a bill of rights guaranteed by the amendments to the Constitution, if we cannot utilize them to protect ourselves from police/government overreach? Logically, the argument of linking criminality to one’s refusal to consent to a search WITHOUT a warrant is judgemental, pigheaded and baseless.
“My 2cents”
To those of you untroubled by police overreaching their authority because “I’m not a criminal”, remember that your rights don’t disappear all at once, it’s bit by bit. How do you feel about pedestrian and vehicular ID checkpoints? Or automated warrantless scans of your emails and social media posts looking for keywords? Or let’s say the cop finds an Oxy pill that a valet, mechanic, or your kid’s friend dropped between your seats? Or maybe you get stopped in a gun free school zone and he finds a few 9mm rounds that fell out of your range bag? I’ll keep my rights as they were written, thanks.
Never let them search your person(s)/ vehicle without a warrant. They can find things where you never would think they can. Do you have a small axe/machete in your car/truck that you use at times while you are camping, trimming hiking/riding trails or maybe to trim your own bushes. Well, if you leave it in your car/truck without knowing and you get seached. When they find it, they can say its a weapon, even though you honestly forgot to take it out. That is why, something so stupid.
The obvious reason is that It is better to be judged by twelve that frisked by one! In a case where it could be a bad apple planning to plant something, ensuring the officer has on record a detail to a warrantless search cover the inadmissible possibility, and if, even in the case of situation where yo have nothing to hide.. having them get a warrant ensures there are more eyes and ears (awareness) on the need for a search and bring into question the officer motives, history of previous searches, biases, etc. .. IMHO
For those of you curious about whether you should deny a search of your automobile the answer is always a resounding YES!! Its not about whether you have something to hide or not! Its about your RIGHTS! If you give them an inch they will take 10 miles; when a cop asks “do you have anything in your car I should be concerned about” even if you say NO it is considered an affirmation to search your car! You should always either NOT answer or say “do you suspect something officer?” And then tell them that you understand your 4th amendment rights; do not ever consent or answer an open and obviously leading question from them.
Granddaughter was stopped for speeding an officer said he smelled weed and asked to search her car? Ohio
Reading the comments, I’m confused. I’m moving all my belongings to Florida. I purchased all my guns legally and I have ammunition that was purchased from the CMP. Are we not covered by the FOPA? (Firearms Owners Protection Act)
So, still, am I supposed to tell them yes or no I have firearms buried in the boxes of belongings?
Damned if I do allow, and damned if I don’t allow. Texas Law Shield, what is your opinion on what I should do if pulled over?
Bobby Lee Stepp said…”If you have nothing to hide what would you care if they looked into your vehicle!”…Well, Bobby Lee, you should care that they are trying to take away your rights. The problem is that innocent people have not cared enough, and now the government is taking advantage of that. Standing up for your rights is never wrong! Freedom isn’t free. You have to fight for it and secure it for future generations.
In response to Bobby Lee Stepp: Many years ago I worked with a crooked cop who routinely asked to search people’s cars, they said OK because they did nothing wrong. He planted a small amount of pot in the car and arrested them, ruining lives in many cases. He had political friends, I had a very long hard battle to get him fired. Never assume you can trust whoever is behind that badge. Never consent to a search.